The Internet and the State

Part 2: Internet Goverance

 

1. ICANN Basics

Reading

  1. United States Department of Commerce, White Paper: Management of Internet Names and Numbers
  2. ICANN, ICANN Fact Sheet & Background
  3. Compare ICANN, ICANN Organizational Chart, with Tony Rutkowski, The ICANN-GAC Organization  (HTML version) ... or try the spiffy powerpoint version (you may need to install a powerpoint viewer by going to the MS Download Center then clicking on the blue "download now" button half way down the page)
  4. Memorandum of Understanding Between the U.S. Department of Commerce and Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers and Amendment 1 to MOU and Amendment 2 to MOU
  5. Froomkin, Wrong Turn in Cyberspace: Using ICANN to Route Around the APA and the Constitution, 50 Duke L.J. 17 (2000).  I've put the whole paper in your packet, but you 'only' need to read pages 26-35, 93-125, 141-155 & (optionally) 160-184.

Doing

  1. Visit the ICANN site, or the Domain Name Handbook, or  ICANNWatch.org (disclaimer: I'm one of the editors) and poke around.

Thinking

  1. To what extent, if any, are the four goals in the White Paper in conflict with each other?
  2. What are ICANN's goals?  To what extent, if any, do they differ from those in the White Paper?
  3. Who runs ICANN?
  4. How would one measure whether ICANN is a "success"?
  5. Can you think of any other organizations that resemble ICANN?
  6. Suppose someone were to sue ICANN and the courts were to revive the non-delegation doctrine.   Would that turn the clock back to Schecter and Panama Refining?

Optional

  1. ICANN, Articles of Incorporation
  2. ICANN, Bylaws
  3. Craig Simon, The Technical Construction of Globalism: Internet Governance and the DNS Crisis (draft, 1998)
  4. Craig Simon, Roots of Power: The Rise of Dot Com and the Decline of the Nation State
  5. ICANN Second Status Report to Department of Commerce (June 30, 2000)
  6. Complaint in Regland v. ICANN (undated, circa. Oct. 31, 2000); ICANN, Advisory Concerning Regland Litigation (Nov. 3, 2000)
  7. David Post, Governing Cyberspace: "Where is James Madison when we need him?" (June 6, 1999)

2. The UDRP Debate

Reading

  1. ICANN, Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
  2. ICANN, Rules for Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy
  3. Froomkin, Semi-Private International Rulemaking: Lessons Learned from the WIPO Domain Name Process (.pdf).
  4. Milton Mueller, Rough Justice: An Analysis of ICANN's Uniform Dispute Resolution

    5. Policy (also available in .pdf format), pp. 6-20, 23-25
  5. Froomkin, ICANN's UDRP: Causes and (Partial) Cures (draft, 2001, not yet on line), pp. 31-64

Thinking

  1. What do you see as the main advantages and disadvantages of the UDRP?
  2. If you were representing a trademark holder, or a domain name registrant, what would you look for in an arbitration provider?  In an arbitrator?
  3. How could one establish a 'arbitration court of appeals' to harmonize UDPR decisions?  Who should pick the people to sit on that panel?

Optional

  1. Read some UDRP decisions from the enormous alphabetical list (warning: this takes a long time to load!).

3. The Alternate Roots Controversy

Reading

  1. .web FAQ
  2. IAB, RFC 2826, IAB Technical Comment on the Unique DNS Root (May, 2000)
  3. M. Stuart Lynn, Completion of "A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS" (ICP-3) (July 9, 2001)
  4. M. Stuart Lynn, A Unique, Authoritative Root for the DNS  (9 July 2001)
  5. David Post, ICANNWatch, Some Thoughts on Stuart Lynn's 'Authoritative Root' Discussion Draft (June 1, 2001)
  6. Jonathan Weinberg, ICANNWatch, How ICANN policy is made (July 10, 2001)
  7. New.net, Proposal to Introduce Market-Based Principles into Domain Name Governance  (.pdf, May 30, 2001)
  8. ICANN Staff, Keeping the Internet a Reliable Global Public Resource: Response to New.net "Policy Paper" (July 9, 2001)
  9. K. Crispin, Alt-Roots, Alt-TLDs (May 2001)

Thinking

  1. What happens if there are two computers with the same domain name in the same root?  In different roots?
  2. How should decisons as to which TLD is added to the legacy root be made?
  3. And how should decisions about who gets the potentially lucrative right to be the registry be made?
  4. To what extent if any should the existence of a functioning 'alternate root' TLD of the same name affect either decision above?
  5. To what extent should the age or size of the 'alternate root' TLD affect either decision?
  6. Which should be selected first - the TLD name or the group that will act as registry?  Or should they be selected as a package deal?
  7. How much disclosure, and of what kind, does the seller of a registration in an 'alternate' TLD owe to customers?

Optional

  1. Karl Auerbach, Delving Into Multiple DNS Roots (MS word file, undated)
  2. S. Higgs, Alternative Roots and the Virtual Inclusive Root (May, 2001)
  3. S. Higgs, Root Server Definitions (May, 2001).

4. ccTLDs and Country Names on the Internet

Reading

  1. J. Postel, RFC 1591 (March 1994)
  2. IANA, ICP 1, Internet Domain Name System Structure and Delegation (May, 1999)
  3. J. Klensin, RFC 3071, Reflections on the DNS (Feb. 2001)
  4. Governmental Advisory Committee, Principles for the Delegation and Administration of Country Code Top Level Domains (Feb. 23, 2000)
  5. ccTLD Constituency of the DNSO, ICANN Services to ccTLD Working Group, Draft Contract for Services between ccTLD Managers and ICANN
  6. Skim: Contact for performance of the IANA function (21 March 2001)
  7. The .cx controversy
    1. Letter, REQUEST TO AMEND SERVER DETAILS CX ccTLD, Alan Fealy (dot cx ltd) to Louis Touton (ICANN), July 26, 2000 (.pdf)
    2. Letter, Request for Clarification, Alan Fealy (dot cx ltd) to Australian National Office for the Information Economy (NOIE), Aug 25, 2000
    3. NOIE Reply to above, Sep. 7, 2000
    4. Derek Newman to Louis Touton, <.cx> Primary Nameserver Changes and Correction to Contact Database, Feb. 13, 2001
  8. European Parliament, European Parliament resolution on the Commission communication to the Council and the European Parliament on 'The Organisation and Management of the Internet - International and European Policy Issues 1998-2000' (COM(2000) 202 - C5-0263/2000 - 2000/2140(COS))
  9. Virtual Countries, Inc. v. Republic of South Africa 2001 WL 687340 (S.D.N.Y, June 18, 2001) available on Westlaw
  10. Republic of South Africa, Ministry of Communications, Comments on WIPO-2, RFC 3 (June 7, 2001)

Thinking

  1. IANA is secretive.  ICANN runs IANA under contract.  Is this consistent with ICANN's obligations under its bylaws?
  2. How should the United States manage the .us domain?  What objectives should it attempt to achieve in so doing?
  3. Is footnote 10 of the Virtual Countries opinion correct?  How would you decide the merits under the UDRP?
  4. Suppose South Africa prevails before WIPO, round 2, and ICANN subsequently agrees to change the UDRP rules to suit it.  In order to bring a UDRP claim, South Africa would have to sign the ordinary consent to jurisdiction in the event that the registrant seeks to bring a court action.  Does this amount to a waiver of sovereign immunity?  If Virtual Countries were to lose the UDRP proceeding, and then bring a new lawsuit in US district court arguing that immunity had been waived, what result?  If the court found waiver, what result on the mertits?

Optional

  1. ccTLD Follies
    1. .ua: Secret police seek to take over
    2. .nr: Hijack attempt
    3. .ph: Conflict
    4. .au: Re-delegation attempt
  2. The .us mess
    1. Brian Kahin, Making Policy by Solicitation: The Outsourcing of .us (2001)  HMTL and .pdf versions.
    2. Sen. Hollings et al, Letter to Dept. of Commerce
    3. Congressman Markey Letter to Dept. of Commerce
    4. The .us RFQ itself.

5. The Problem of Representation on a Global Scale

Readings

  1. Damien Cave, New Republic Online, Freaked Geeks: Why Netizens can't learn to stop worrying and love ICANN (Sept. 26, 2000)
  2. Froomkin, Beware the ICANN Board Squatters! and Update: Replacing the ICANN Board Squatters
  3. Esther Dyson, SF Gate, Challenges for domain managers (May 27, 2001)
  4. ALSC Interim Report to ICANN Board (June 4, 2001)
  5. NAIS, Interim Report Executive Summary in .pdf or html. (June, 2001) (Or, optionally, you can read the entire report in .pdf or html links from the table of contents)
  6. RTMark.com, Voteauction Satire Illegally Squelched, Will Re-Open in Hundreds of Places (Nov. 5, 2000) & Voteauction.com, Vote-auction announces END-RESULTS (Nov. 7, 2000)
  7. Jonathan Weinberg, ICANN and the Problem of Legitimacy,  50 Duke L.J. 187 (2000), §§ III, IV & Conclusion
  8. Jonathan Weinberg, Geeks and Greeks (.pdf draft June, 2001), pp. 6-12 & 26-39

Thinking

  1. Who should have a say in picking ICANN directors?  How much?
  2. What additional things would you worry about when conducting an on-line election in addition to the usual things that apply to ordinary elections?  Are any of the traditional worries magnified or alleviated?
  3. If the Internet continues to grow at its current pace, pretty soon there will be billions of users, and potentially hundreds of millions of domain names and registrants.  Can ICANN elections scale?  How?
  4. If ICANN elections cannot scale, what then?

Optional

  1. Calif. Internet Voting Task Force, A Report on the Feasibility of Internet Voting (Jan. 2000)
  2. Doug Jones, Some Comments on the California Internet Voting Task Force Report of January 2000 (Apr. 12, 2000)
  3. Safevote, Voting System Requirements (Nov. 2000) (.pdf)
  4. A debate over amendment of the ICANN By-laws
    1. Froomkin, Comments on Proposed Changes to ICANN By-Laws
    2. Joe Sims, Response to Froomkin
    3. Froomkin, ICANN and Individuals
    4. Joe Sims, Re: [names] From Michael Froomkin
  5. Another debate over representation:
    1. Steve Kettmann, ICANN Chief Strikes Back, Wired.com June 13, 2001

      2. Bret  A. Fausett, Who Represents Whom?, ICANNWatch, June 13, 2001

6.  More on Elections

Reading

  1. ICANN At-Large Study Committee (ALSC)  (aka The Bildt Committee) Report
  2. The Executive Summary of the NGO and Academic ICANN Study (NAIS) Report in either .pdf or HTML.(Aug. 31, 2001)
  3. Joe Sims, Evaluation of NAIS and ALSC Reports (Sept. 7, 2001)
  4. Donald Simon, NAIS report and Joe Sims (Sept. 25, 2001)

Optional

  1. The entire NAIS Final Report (150 pages...) (.pdf only)
To Part 1   Part 2   Part 3   Part 4   Part 5
To Syllabus Index
To Class Policies
 

Last update Oct 1, 2001